I'm not gonna argue really, because in this sim you guys are right. Why make a corp with limited profitibility when you can instead make a corp of the most profitible industry at the time? But if you think of the big picture in terms of every corp on the planet it causes market stability. One way or another you need supplies they cost money, you can control that cost. If they are unprofitable that sucks, if you are capable of cutting costs more to your profit centers then the loss it is a sound investment. But since this isn't always the case in which the loss can be larger the same holds true about the common market, they sell to their trade partners for a reduced rate, essentially crushing their profitability the exact same way as if you creating a corp to replace them. This all leads back to the intent of this thread. Independent (control) costs are too high for corps that not only make supply corps and the common market completely unusable and not only creates a major instability in the markets, but also makes it much more profitable to use state corps in the place of enterprise corps. Not in respect to the country but in respect to the corporations profitibility in the end that is what matters. Because the incentive of the CEO has vanished with the exception of higher game levels and sheer volume. I don't attribute this to CRU like most others but excessive inputs to supply the outputs of corporations. How many steaks does one cow make? Now if the steak also requires a trillion services, and 1 million Kwatts of power, can the steak really be a profitable industry? This was an exaggeration obviously and steak isn't an idustry (i simply didn't want to do the math). Andy said somewhere that he will make moves to increase profitibility but lowering output in certain industries like for exaple the recent reductions in FMU's and production plants don't increase profitibility because they are industries that will merely suffer those losses. Since profit margins are spread so thin, and my state corps have been making bills a month and my enterprises sometimes touch 800m but usually fall between 350-550m there's a little dissonance there. a corp takes like 67B to start up 67000/300=18.6111 years too pay for itself with minimal profits afters that. Cutting CRU at that end will just end the incentive for countries, lowering fixed costs will make the game unrealistic. The only ways to fix this VERY REAL problem is for corps to increase their outputs further in comparison to other costs for enterprises or decrease needed supply volume. To cement my point think about the world market, with infinite money and employees how many corps at 100% would it take to balance the supply and demand? YEAH, a ton because each one you make supplies nearly the exact amount in demand for other products.